The Defeat of the Romans in the Nearest Land: A Quranic Miracle or a Quranic Mistake?

Summary:

Islamists assert the following:

• When the Prophet was in Mecca, the Persians defeated the Christian Romans (Byzantines) in 614 CE. 
• However, at that time, Quranic verses 30:2-4 were revealed, predicting that the Romans would reclaim victory over the Persians within 3 to 9 years.

Quran 3:2-6:

غُلِبَتِ ٱلرُّومُ فِىٓ أَدْنَى ٱلْأَرْضِ وَهُم مِّنۢ بَعْدِ غَلَبِهِمْ سَيَغْلِبُونَ فِى بِضْعِ سِنِينَ ۗ لِلَّهِ ٱلْأَمْرُ مِن قَبْلُ وَمِنۢ بَعْدُ ۚ وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ ٱلْمُؤْمِنُونَ بِنَصْرِ ٱللَّهِ ۚ يَنصُرُ مَن يَشَآءُ ۖ وَهُوَ ٱلْعَزِيزُ ٱلرَّحِيمُ وَعْدَ ٱللَّهِ ۖ لَا يُخْلِفُ ٱللَّهُ وَعْدَهُۥ وَلَٰكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ ٱلنَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ 

The Romans (Byzantines) have been defeated in a nearby land. Yet following their defeat, they will triumph within a few (from 3 to nine) years (بِضْعِ سِنِينَ). To Allah belongs the command before and after. And that day the believers will rejoice in the victory of Allah. He gives victory to whom He wills, and He is the Exalted in Might, the Merciful. [It is] the promise of Allah. Allah does not fail in His promise, but most of the people do not know.

Arabic is a bit unique. The Arabic word بضع, which means "a few," has a more precise range, referring specifically to a number between 3 and 9 (Link). 

Thus, these verses outlined two conditions:

1. The Byzantines would achieve victory within 3 to 9 years.
2. On that day, Muslims would also experience a victory and rejoice.

According to Islamists, this prophecy was fulfilled:

• The Byzantines triumphed over the Persians in 624 CE.
• This coincided with the Battle of Badr (where Muslims also achieved victory and rejoiced), which occurred 10 years later, in 624 CE.

Muslims often present the following tradition of Abu Bakr as evidence for this claim:

Jami` at-Tirmidhi, 3193:

Narrated by Al-Husayn ibn Hurayth, from Mu'awiyah ibn 'Amr, from Abu Ishaq al-Fazari, from Sufyan al-Thawri, from Habib ibn Abi 'Amrah, from Sa'id ibn Jubayr from Ibn 'Abbas, regarding the saying of Allah, Most High: Alif Lam Mim. The Romans have been defeated. In the nearest land (30:1-3)" he said: "Ghulibat wa Ghalabat (defeated and then victorious)." He said: "The idolaters wanted the Persians to be victorious over the Romans because they too were people who worshiped idols, while the Muslims wanted the Romans to be victorious over the Persians because they were people of the Book. This was mentioned to Abu Bakr, so Abu Bakr mentioned that to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and he said: 'They will certainly prevail.' Abu Bakr mentioned that to them, and they said: 'Make a wager between us and you; if we win, we shall get this and that, and if you win, you shall get this or that.' He made the term five years, but they (the Romans) were not victorious. They mentioned that to the Prophet (ﷺ) and he said: "Why did you not make it less (than)" - He (one of the narrators said): I think he said: "ten?" He said: Sa'eed said: "Al-Bid' is what is less than then" - he said: "Afterwards the Romans have been victorious." He said: "That is what Allah Most High said: 'Alif Lam Mim. The Romans have been defeated' up to His saying: 'And on the day, the believers will rejoice - with the help of Allah. He helps whom He wills (30:1-5).' 

Sufyan (the sub-narrator) said: "I heard that they were victorious over them on the Day of Badr."

Grade: Sahih (Darussalam)

Therefore, Islamists present these verses as a "Quranic Miracle."

Note: The above hadith does not explicitly claim that the Byzantines became victorious over the Persians on the day of the Battle of Badr. It was only a sub-narrator, Sufyan, who made this connection. However, he provided no sources for this information, which makes that part of the tradition (i.e., the victory coinciding with the day of Badr) unreliable and non-authentic. 

Criticism:

Doubt 1: No Sahih Hadith Claims that Byzantines Were Victorious on the Day of the Battle of Badr

It is important to note the following:

• The hadith from Jami` at-Tirmidhi [3193] does not claim that the Byzantines were victorious over the Persians on the day of the Battle of Badr.
• This was merely an assumption made by a sub-narrator, Sufyan, who provided no sources for this information. As such, the part of the tradition suggesting that the Byzantines victory coincided with the Battle of Badr is non-authentic.

Islamic traditions contain numerous differing rumors regarding the timing of the Byzantines victory. One such tradition even claims that these Quranic verses were revealed after the Roman victory on the day of Badr. However, Muslims themselves deny this tradition, as will be discussed later in this article. It is highly probable that Sufyan, the sub-narrator, may have drawn his information from this rejected tradition.

Thus, Islamists' assertion of this Quranic "miracle" relies ONLY on:

• One vague verse from the Quran.
• One sub-narrator (Sufyan), who lived generations after the event and whose account is not part of any Sahih (authentic) hadith.

In contrast, there are more reliable but contradictory versions of the same hadith from Abu Bakr, which suggest the Roman victory did not occur on the day of Badr. Instead, it is claimed to have happened either in Mecca or during the Treaty of Hudaybiyah in 628 CE. We will explore these alternate versions later in this article and examine why Islamists choose to ignore these more credible versions of Abu Bakr's hadith.

Doubt 2: The Verse Is Vague About Which Roman (Byzantine) Victory Was Meant

The Quranic verse in question is vague regarding which specific Roman victory was being referred to. There is no clear indication as to which of the following events the verse was pointing to:

• Was it the First Victory of the Romans against the Persians in Anatolia (622 CE)?
• Was it the First Attack on the Persian mainland (624 CE)?
• Was it the Final Decisive Victory in the war (627 CE)?
• Or was it the Capture of Jerusalem by the Romans and the return of Christ's cross and other religious relics?

The lack of specificity in the verse creates uncertainty, as the Roman-Persian conflict was a long and complex war with multiple significant milestones. Without any clear reference, it's difficult to determine which victory aligns with the prophecy made in the Quran. This vagueness raises questions about the exact timeline of events, making the claim of a "Quranic miracle" harder to substantiate.

Here is the timeline of this this war. 

Timeline of Byzantine–Sasanian War of 602–628:

• 602 to 614 CE: The Persians started defeating the Romans and capturing their territories. They captured Jerusalem in 614 CE.
• 614 to 622 CE: The conflict nearly reached a status quo, although the Persians continued to achieve some more victories.
• 622 CE: The Romans secured their first victory over the Persians in Anatolia (modern Turkey). [Islamists claim it to be that victory which fulfilled the prophecy] 
• 624 CE: The Romans launched attacks on the Persian mainland and captured one of their main fire temples (out of three).
• 625 CE: Numerous important battles took place. Although the Persians had the upper hand with their numerical advantage, the Byzantines somehow managed to win those battles despite all odds.
• 626 CE: The climax of the war occurred when the Persians attacked Constantinople, but they failed to capture the city. Despite their considerable chances, the Persians were unable to conquer Constantinople.
• 627 CE: The Battle of Nineveh occurred in the Persian heartland (modern-day Iran). It was only after this battle that it became clear the Byzantines had decisively defeated the Persians.
• 628 CE: The war concluded with the Byzantines regaining all their lost territories like Jerusalem, including the retrieval of significant relics like the Christ's Cross.

Doubt 3: Victory of Anatolia did not COINCIDE with the Victory of Badr

Islamists insist that it was that FIRST victory of Byzantines in Anatolia in 622 CE, which fulfilled this prophecy. 

However, critics point out that:

• Decisive Victory Questioned: The Meccan Pagans would not have viewed this as a 'Decisive' defeat for the Persians, nor would they have handed over the wager (which consisted of several dozens of camels) to Abu Bakr. The Persians still held a huge numerical advantage over the Byzantines and had the potential to win subsequent battles, possibly even capturing Constantinople and ending the whole Byzantine Empire altogether (link). Events were favoring the Persians, while the odds seemed to favor the Byzantines.
• Why did Islamists' choose this Date?: Islamists are compelled to choose this date of 622 CE because it is the only battle that falls within the 9-year limit (from the Byzantine defeat in Jerusalem in 614 CE) mentioned in their narrative.
• Timing of the Victory: This claim is further undermined by the fact that this victory did not coincide with the Battle of Badr, which occurred two years later in 624 CE. According to the Quranic verses, Muslims were supposed to rejoice their victory on the same day, which was not the case here.

Islamists present the excuse to cover up this 2 years difference: 

It may be that it took 2 years for the news of this victory to travel from Anatolia to Medina by the day of the Battle of Badr.

However, this excuse is questionable, as trade caravans were regularly traveling to various cities in Arabia, making it highly unlikely that such significant news would take 2 years to reach Medina.

Moreover, both the Byzantine and Sasanian empires had long depended on alliances with Arab tribes. The Ghasanids and Lakhmids, two prominent Arab tribal confederations, played key roles in the conflicts between these two powers. Historical sources confirm Arab involvement on both sides of the battlefield. For instance, in July 622, Heraclius defeated a Sasanian-led army commanded by an Arab chief in Armenia (Greatrex / Lieu 2002, 199). Given this, it is highly unlikely that news of the Byzantine victory in Anatolia took two years to reach Medina.

Doubt 4: The First attack on the Persian Mainland was also not DECISIVE

Some modern Islamists have revised their narrative, now claiming that the Quranic prophecy was fulfilled by the Roman's First Attack on the Iranian Mainland (the present day Azerbaijan area) in 624 CE, where they captured one of Persia's main fire temples (one of three).

However, the problems with this claim are:

• Again, this event was also not a 'decisive' defeat for the Persians as they were still more powerful and have huge numerical advantage.
• Thus, it is highly unlikely that the Meccan Pagans would not have handed over the wager to Abu Bakr, as the Persians still had a strong chance of defeating the Byzantines and even capturing Constantinople.
• Additionally, this battle took place in 624 CE, 10 years after the prophecy, exceeding the Quranic timeframe of 3 to 9 years. 

Moreover, Islamists this time take a U-Turn and claim that the news travelled IMMEDIATELY from Azerbaijan to Medina in the same year on the day of the Battle of Badr. This contradicts their previous excuse, where they asserted that it took two years for the news to travel from Anatolia to Medina.

Doubt 5: When did Abu Bakr go to Mecca after the Battle of Badr to pay the wager?

Hostilities between the Muslims and the Pagan Meccans reached their peak after the Battle of Badr. The Meccans were furious not only because Muslims had been attacking and looting their trade caravans, but also because many Meccans were killed during the battle.

This raises the question: when exactly did Abu Bakr go to Mecca to pay the wager?

The account of Abu Bakr appears to be entirely ahistorical.

Doubt 6: Contradictory Sahih Hadith that the victory happened after 7 years:

Let us see this so-called Sahih Hadith:

Jami` at-Tirmidhi, 3194: 

Narrated Niyar bin Mukram Al-Aslami: "...  when Allah revealed these Ayat, Abu Bakr As-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, went out, proclaiming throughout Makkah: 'Alif Lam Mim. The Romans have been defeated. In the nearest land, and they, after their defeat, will be victorious, in Bid' years (30:1-4).' Some of the Quraish said: 'Then this is (a bet) between us and you. Your companion claims that the Romans will defeat the Persians in Bid' years, so why have have a bet on that between us and you?' Abu Bakr said: 'Yes.' This was before betting has been forbidden. So Abu Bakr and the idolaters made a bet, and they said to Abu Bakr: 'What do you think - Bid' means something between three and nine years, so let us agree on the middle.' So they agreed on six years; Then six years passed without the Romans being victorious. The idolaters took what they won in the bet from Abu Bakr. When the seventh year came and the Romans were finally victorious over the Persians, the Muslims rebuked Abu Bakr for agreeing to six years. He said: 'Because Allah said: 'In Bid' years.' At that time, many people became Muslims.""

Grade: Sahih (Darussalam)

Doubt 7: Why Didn't the Meccan Pagans or Medinan Jews Convert to Islam After This Alleged Miracle?

Aside from this version of this tradition involving Abu Bakr, there isn't any other evidence that suggests the Meccan pagans converted to Islam in large numbers following the fulfillment of this prophecy.

Even if we assume that the Roman victory occurred not in Mecca but in Medina around the time of Badr (as Islamists claim), there is still no tradition indicating that Muhammad presented this miracle as proof of his prophethood to either the Jews of Medina or the Meccan pagans.

In fact, during the entire Medinan period, fewer than ten Jews converted to Islam. This led to Muhammad's extreme anger towards them, resulting in the expulsion or execution of all Jewish tribes in Medina, ensuring that not a single Jew remained in the city.

Sahih Bukhari, 3941:

Sahih Muslim, 2793:

Similarly, the Meccan pagans didn't accept Islam till the victory of Mecca in 7th Hijri (even affter Hudaybiyyah). There is no proof that Muhammad ever presented this alleged miracle and wager of Abu Bakr to them as proof of his prophethood, although Meccan were previously constantly asking Muhammad to bring any miracle which could serve as proof of his prophethood. 

But during his whole Meccan life, Muhammad alway doged their demand of bringing a miracle. Muhammad presented many EXCUSES for his inability to show any miracle, which have been recorded in the Quran themselves. For example:

• Muhammad cannot show a miracle while he is only a human (Quran 17:90-93). However, this exccuse has no weight as pagans didn't challenge only Muhammad, but his Allah too.
• Then the Quran made an excuse that Allah refrain to show any more miracle to anyone, while earlier nations were had been shown miracles, but they still didn't believe (Quran 17:58-59). 
• ... and many more such Quranic excuses. 

We highly recommend our Redears to read this important article:

• Allah's FAILURE to pass his own TEST of showing a Miracle

(PS: Actually, the Meccan pagans didn't even convert to Islam after the victory of Mecca. Muhammad stipulated a stipend for them and hoped that they would convert to Islam in greed of money and power. The Meccan pagans converted to Islam only after the revelation of the verse of sword (Quran 9:5). After that, they were left with no other choice except to convert to Islam, or to be killed). 

Doubt 8: Contradictory but more reliable Hadiths that the victory happened on the day of Hudaybiyah (in 628 CE)

There is yet other versions (allegely more reliable than the Badr version) of the hadith of Abu Bakr, which claim that the victory didn't happen on the day of Badr (in 624 CE), but much later on the day of Hudaybiyyah (in 628 CE).

1st hadith (Go to للمتخصص):

لمَّا نزَلتْ: {الم * غُلِبَتِ الرُّومُ} [الروم: الآيتان: 1-2]، لقِيَ أبو بَكرٍ رضِيَ اللهُ عنه رجالًا منَ المُشرِكِينَ، فقال لهم: إنَّ أهلَ الكتابِ سيَغلِبونَ على فارسَ قالوا: في كم؟ قال: في بِضعِ سِنينَ، قال: ثمَّ خاطَروا بيْنَهم خطرًا، وذلكَ قبْلَ أنْ يُحرَّمَ القِمارُ عليهم، فجاء أبو بَكرٍ رضِيَ اللهُ عنه، فأخبَر رسولَ اللهِ صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلَّمَ بذلكَ، قال له رسولُ اللهِ صلَّى اللهُ عليه وسلَّمَ: ما دونَ العَشْرِ منَ البِضعِ، فكان ظُهورُ فارسَ على الرُّوم لِسَبعِ سِنينَ، ثمَّ أظهَر اللهُ الرُّومَ على فارسَ زمنَ الحُدَيْبيَةِ، ففرِح المُسلِمونَ بظُهورِ أهلِ الكتابِ، وكان ظُهورُ المُسلِمِينَ على المُشرِكِينَ بعدَ الحُدَيْبيَةِ.

الراوي : رجل من الصحابة | المحدث : شعيب الأرناؤوط | المصدر : تخريج مشكل الآثار
الصفحة أو الرقم : 2989 | خلاصة حكم المحدث : [فيه] نعيم بن حماد_ وإن روى له البخاري_ كثير الخطأ، ومن فوقه ثقات من رجال الشيخين

When the verses "Alif Lam Mim. The Byzantines have been defeated" [Quran 30:1-2] were revealed, Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) met with some polytheists and said to them, "The people of the Book will defeat the Persians." They asked, "In how many years?" He replied, "In a few years." Then they made a wager among themselves, before gambling was prohibited for them. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) then informed the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) about this, and the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said to him, "Do not make the term less than ten years." So the Persians' victory over the Byzantines took place seven years later, and then Allah showed the Byzantines' victory over the Persians at the time of Al-Hudaybiyah. The Muslims rejoiced at the victory of the people of the Book, and the Muslims' victory over the polytheists came after Al-Hudaybiyah.

Narrator: A man from the Companions
Hadith Scholar: Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut
Source: Takhreej Mushkil al-Athar
Page or Number: 2989
Summary of the Hadith Scholar's Ruling: In it (i.e., in the chain of narration) is Na'eem ibn Hammad — even though al-Bukhari narrated from him — he made many mistakes. However, those above him (in the chain) are reliable, and they are narrators of both al-Bukhari and Muslim.

3rd Hadith (link):

عَنِ ابنِ التَّيْمِيِّ، عَنْ مُغِيرَةَ، عَنِ الشَّعْبِيِّ، فِي قَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى: {إِنَّا فَتَحْنَا لَكَ فَتْحًا مُبِينًا} قَالَ: «نَزَلَتْ بَعْدَ الحُدَيْبِيَةِ، فَغُفِرَ لَهُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِهِ وَمَا تَأَخَّرَ، وَبَايَعُوهُ مُبَايَعَةَ الرِّضْوَانِ، وَأَطْعَمُوا كُلَّ خَيْبَرَ، وَظَهَرَتِ الرُّومُ عَلَى فَارِسَ، وَفَرِحَ المُؤْمِنُونَ بِتَصَدِيقِ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ، وَظَهَرَ أَهْلُ الكِتَابِ عَلَى المَجُوسِ».

وهذا إسناد صحيح إلى الشعبيّ.

From Ibn al-Taymi, from Mughirah, from al-Shaʽbi, regarding the verse: "Indeed, We have granted you a clear victory" (Quran 48:1), he said: "It was revealed after Hudaybiyyah. Therefore, forgiveness was granted for what had previously occurred of his sins and what would come after. The people pledged allegiance to him with the pledge of satisfaction, and they provided food for all of Khaybar. (That day) The Romans achieved victory over the Persians, and the believers rejoiced at the confirmation of Allah's Book, and the People of the Book triumphed over the Magians."

This chain of narration is authentic to al-Shaʽbi.

4th Hadith:

حدثنا بشر، قال: ثنا يزيد، قال: ثنا سعيد، عن قَتادة { آلـم غُلِبَتِ الرُّومُ } قال: غَلَبتهم فـارسُ علـى أدنى الشام { وَهُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ غَلَبِهِمْ سيَغْلِبُونَ... } الآية، قال: لـما أنزل الله هؤلاء الآيات صَدّق الـمسلـمون ربهم، وعلـموا أن الروم سيظهرون علـى فـارس، فـاقتـمروا هم والـمشركون خمسَ قلائص، خمَس قلائص، وأَجَّلوا بـينهم خمس سنـين، فولـيَ قِمار الـمسلـمين أبو بكر رضي الله عنه، وولـيَ قِمار الـمشركين أُبـيّ بن خـلف، وذلك قبل أن يُنْهَى عن القمار، فحلَّ الأجل، ولـم يظهر الروم علـى فـارس، وسأل الـمشركون قِمارهم، فذَكَر ذلك أصحاب النبـيّ للنبـيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: " لَـمْ تَكُونُوا أحِقَّاءَ أنْ تُؤَجِّلُوا دُونَ العَشْرِ، فإنَّ البِضْعَ ما بـينَ الثَّلاثِ إلـى العَشْرِ، وَزَايِدُوهُمْ فِـي القِمار، وَمادُّوهُمْ فِـي الأجَلِ " ، ففعلوا ذلك، فأظهر الله الروم علـى فـارس عند رأس البِضْع سنـينَ من قمارهم الأوّل، وكان ذلك مرجعَه من الـحديبـية، ففرح الـمسلـمون بصلـحهم الذي كان، وبظهور أهل الكتاب علـى الـمـجوس، وكان ذلك مـما شدّد الله به الإسلام وهو قوله { وَيَوْمَئِذٍ يَفْرَحُ الـمُؤْمِنُونَ بِنَصْرِ اللّهِ... } الآية.

Sa'id ibn Abi 'Arubah narrated from Qatadah, who said regarding the verse: "The Romans have been defeated in the nearest land" (Quran 30:2): "The Persians defeated the Romans in the southern part of the Levant. 'But after their defeat, they will defeat [the Persians] in a few years' (Quran 30:3). When Allah Almighty revealed these verses, the Muslims believed in their Lord and knew that the Romans would prevail over the Persians. They made a wager with the polytheists involving five camels and set a period of five years. Abu Bakr, may Allah be pleased with him, took charge of the Muslims' wager, and Ubayy ibn Khalaf managed the polytheists' wager. This was before gambling was prohibited in the matter of set periods. Since the Romans had not yet prevailed over the Persians, the polytheists demanded their wager. The companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) reported this to him, and he said: 'They should not have set a period less than ten years. The term "a few" refers to a range between three and ten years. Extend the period and adjust the terms of the wager.' So they did, and Allah made the Romans prevail over the Persians at the end of the initial period of their wager. This occurred just after the Hudaybiyyah event. The Muslims rejoiced at this victory, which was a sign of the success of the People of the Book over the Magians, and it was a confirmation of Allah strengthening Islam, as mentioned in the verse: 'And on that Day the believers will rejoice in the victory of Allah' (Quran 30:4)."

And by al-Bayhaqi also recorded in "Dala'il al-Nubuwwah" (2/333) from al-Abbas ibn al-Walid al-Bayruti, from Sa'id ibn Abi 'Arubah and he from Qatada (link).

Critique:

• When it comes to traditions, then the most authentic account is that it was about victory of Hudaybiyyah (in 628 CE). 
• It is also supported by the fact, that indeed the Byzantines got the control of Jerusalem back in 628 CE (which is a LOGICAL conclusion as the verses were initially talking about the defeat of the Romans in Jerusalem (i.e. the near land) in 614 CE). 

However, Islamists were FORCED to NEGLECT these facts, and to stick with the non-authentic statement of sub-narrator Sufyan (i.e. the day of Badr in 624 CE). And the reasons are obvious that:

•  If we assume it happened on the day of Hudaybiyyah, then it becomes 14 years from the defeat (in 614 CE) of the Romans to their victory (in 628 CE)
• And it far exceed the time limit of 3 to 9 years by the Quran, ultimately making it a Quranic Mistake instead of the miracle. 

Therefore, Islamists had to neglect it altogether, and stick to non-authentic statement of the sub-narrator Sufyan, to avoid this Quranic mistake. 

Doubt 9: Contradictory Sahih Hadith that these verses were revealed on the day of Badr, when the Roman Victory HAD already taken place

The following tradition tells that these verses were not revealed in 614 AD, but in 624 AD, when the Romans had already defeated the Persians. 

Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3192 and 2935:

حَدَّثَنَا نَصْرُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ الْجَهْضَمِيُّ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا الْمُعْتَمِرُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ سُلَيْمَانَ الأَعْمَشِ، عَنْ عَطِيَّةَ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ، قَالَ لَمَّا كَانَ يَوْمُ بَدْرٍ ظَهَرَتِ الرُّومُ عَلَى فَارِسَ فَأَعْجَبَ ذَلِكَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ فَنَزَلَتْ ‏(‏ الم * غُلِبَتِ الرُّومُ ‏)‏ إِلَى قَوْلِهِ ‏(‏يَفْرَحُ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ ‏)‏ قَالَ فَفْرَحَ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ بِظُهُورِ الرُّومِ عَلَى فَارِسَ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ غَرِيبٌ مِنْ هَذَا الْوَجْهِ ‏.‏ وَيُقْرَأُ غَلَبَتْ وَغُلِبَتْ يَقُولُ كَانَتْ غُلِبَتْ ثُمَّ غَلَبَتْ هَكَذَا قَرَأَ نَصْرُ بْنُ عَلِيٍّ غَلَبَتْ ‏.‏

... from Abu Sa'id, who said: 'On the day of Badr, the Romans triumphed over the Persians, and this pleased the believers. Then the verse was revealed (Alif Lam Meem. The Romans have been defeated) up to the verse (and the believers will rejoice). The believers rejoiced at the victory of the Romans over the Persians.'"

Abu Isa (Tirmidhi) said: "This is a Hasan Gharib Hadith from this chain." It can be recited as "Ghulibat" [i.e. (The Romans) have been defeated (by the Persians)] or "Ghalabat" [i.e. (The Romans) have defeated (the Persians)], meaning they were (earlier) defeated but then triumphed. This is how Nasr ibn Ali recited it as "Ghalabat" [i.e. (The Romans) have defeated (the Persians)].

Therefore, if this tradition is correct and these verses were revealed at the time of the Battle of Badr (i.e. in 624 AD), then it means that the Qur’anic ‘prophecy’ is no prophecy at all, as it emerged only after the very event it was meant to predict (i.e., the Romans had already achieved their victory, and the verse was revealed afterward on the day of Badr).

That is why, Islamists themselves deny this tradition and don't believe that these verses were revealed on the day of Badr. 

Not only this tradition, but most earliest Koran versions also use the opposite word of it indicating Romans were victorious, i.e “ghalabati “. Since gulibati and galabati exist in variant readings throughout, the reason is that the dots and vowels were invented later; This making 37+ Koran versions changing meaning of words.

Salafi Hadith master Albani first authenticated this tradition and then wrote in its commentary (link):

وأمَّا قولُه: {سَيَغْلِبُونَ} فإنَّ جمهورَ القُرَّاءِ على فتحِ الياءِ فيها، والواجبُ على قِراءةِ مَن قرأ: (غَلَبَتِ الرُّومُ) بفتحِ الغينِ أن يقرَأَ قولَه: (سَيُغْلَبُونَ) بضمِّ الياءِ، فيكونَ معناه: وهم مِن غلَبتِهم فارِسَ سيَغلِبُهم المسلِمون؛ حتَّى يَصِحَّ معنى الكلامِ.

As for the phrase "they will overcome," the majority of reciters read it with a fatha on the "ي" (يَغْلِبُونَ). Those who read "The Romans have defeated" with a fatha on the "غ" should recite "they will be defeated" with a damma on the "ي" (يُغْلَبُونَ), making it mean that after the Persians' defeat by the Romans, the Romans will themselves eventually be defeated by the Muslims (and Muslims will rejoice upon their victory over Romans), so the meaning of the verse remains coherent.

However, this claim by Albani will still pose a challenge, while Muslims didn't get victory over the Romans within 3 to 9 years time, making it a Quranic Mistake. The earlier Muslim Caliphs FIRST defeated the Romans (Byzantine Empire) during the Battle of Yarmouk, which took place in 636 AD.

Nearest or lowest land?

Sometimes it is claimed that adnā l-arḍi in verse 3 should be interpreted in verse 30:3 to mean "the lowest land" rather than "the nearest land" (adnā is from the same root as the word dun'yā and is primarily defined as "nearest"). By this interpretation the Quran is claimed to have miraculously revealed that the Dead Sea in modern Israel was the lowest point on earth, a fact not known by humans until modern times.

Our Response:

Besides the very questionable linguistic interpretation, the main problem with this miracle claim is that the Byzantines did not fight the Persians beside the Dead Sea, which is part of the Jordan rift valley, but rather they beseiged and captured Jerusalem in 614 CE, which is well above sea level.

Conclusion:

Given the accurate historical timeline of the Persian-Roman war, as recorded by non-Muslim historians, it becomes clear that:

• The author of the Quran made an ERROR in predicting in 614 CE that the Romans would achieve victory within 3 to 9 years. However, this prophecy turned out to be incorrect, as the Roman victory occurred much later, approximately 14-15 years later.
• When later generations of Muslims realized this Quranic mistake, they attempted to cover it up by fabricating traditions to defend the Quran.
• However, these hadith fabricators were unaware of the detailed accounts preserved by non-Muslim historians, who meticulously documented the timeline of the war. The fabricators did not anticipate that future generations would be able to compare their fabricated traditions with the historical timeline and expose their falsehoods. None of these fabricated hadiths align with the historically accurate timeline recorded by non-Muslims, leading to the exposure of their deceit.
• Furthermore, these fabricated hadiths have led to numerous CONTRADICTIONS among themselves, which is a common consequence when falsehoods are propagated

External Links:

• "'The Romans Will Win!' Q 30:2‒7 in Light of 7th c. Political Eschatology." Der Islam 2018; 95 (1): 1–29

Credit: The credit goes to the article of WikiIslam.Net and to an unknown ex-Muslim who also made significant contributions to this subject in one of his posts.